Recall provision sought for Holden officials

BY MELISSA MCKEON MMCKEON@HOLDENLANDMARK.COM

Thursday

Sep 10, 2009 at 12:01 AM

HOLDEN - More than 140 town residents have joined former Holden selectman Joseph Sullivan in submitting a citizen petition that could start the process of allowing Holden voters to recall local elected officials.

Sullivan and others circulated a petition at the Aug. 22 Holden Days event seeking the placement on the next special town meeting warrant of a petition to the legislature. That petition would allow the town to amend its charter to permit citizens to recall elected officials. The town currently has no such provision; 21 other towns in Massachusetts do.

It's only the beginning of a long process before any such recall might happen, but one, nonetheless, that Sullivan believes is vital.

"At any given time, a legislative person, a person who has been elected to uphold the laws of Massachusetts, if they run astray, there's no right of the voters to say, 'We think you need to be removed,'" Sullivan said.

Sullivan is not shy about what prompted his effort. He told the select board on Aug. 17 that the events in June that resulted in the impending departure of Town Manger Brian Bullock over a a contract dispute left the town with big questions to answer. Most notably, he asked, what the select board might have done differently and what the "ultimate boss, 'the voter,'" could do.

"I think that the recent events at least pointed out the fact that voters have no recourse," Sullivan said this week.

The recourse Sullivan spoke of could involve removing those selectmen many believe were responsible for the town manager leaving next spring.

"I do feel that I have a target on my back," Selectman David White said.

Selectman Kenneth O'Brien said he, too, feels the move is directed at him and is masquerading as necessary change to town government.

"I think that if the recall petition was circulated under the guise of charter reform, then I think it's a sham," O'Brien said.

Sullivan's move is the latest in a string of events that began at a June 18 select board meeting, when White asked for reconsideration of the evergreen clause in Bullock's contract. Subsequent closed-door discussions resulted in an impasse over the clause, and a change to Bullock's contract to end it in the spring of 2010.

Once news of the discussions and votes — and Bullock's planned departure — surfaced, the subsequent public outcry occupied radio time, editorial pages and, Sullivan said, the phone lines, for weeks. In 12 years of elected office, Sullivan said, he'd never received such feedback from the public as when the news filtered down that the move by the select board would result in Bullock leaving next spring after 23 years as Holden's town manager.

Study committee requested Sullivan spoke to the select board during the Aug. 17 meeting, asking the members to consider appointing a study committee to consider the matter.

"The response was simply overwhelming and the anger unfettered," Sullivan said. "The conclusion that so many have come to is that our elected officials should be held accountable every moment in office."

Sullivan believes a recall could allow voters to remove an elected official who has been in office more than six months and who has more than six months to go in his or her term, for just cause.

Sullivan said after he appeared at the select board Aug. 17 meeting other residents convinced him to initiate the citizens' petition to start the process.

But some selectmen believe Sullivan is just reacting to the fact that the select board didn't immediately move to create a committee on Aug. 17, something White says wouldn't be standard procedure anyway.

"The board doesn't take it up that minute," he said. "It's something that people think about and talk about and then decide, What do we want to do here?'"

White finds a certain irony in Sullivan's petition as well.

"These same people have always wanted to study everything to death," he said. "Now they seem to feel that it's okay to push this through."

O'Brien thinks Sullivan's petition is just a move on the part of a "disgruntled" person to "inject himself into the political process."

But both also believe charter reform might be a good idea. In fact, O'Brien said he requested to have a study committee appointment discussed at the Sept. 8 select board meeting (held after The Landmark went to press).

But O'Brien doesn't support the recall provision.

Renzoni, however, does support it, and even signed Sullivan's petition.

He said updating the charter could be a good thing for the town. The charter should stay current with the town's needs, Renzoni said.

"Holden 1999 is a totally different place from Holden 2009," he noted.

Renzoni favors appointing a charter study committee to gather all the facts before any votes, so that decisions are not made on emotions and personal reactions.

Board Chair Kimberly Ferguson reserved comment on the issue for whenever the board will discuss it.

Selectman James Jumonville said a recall provision could be a good thing.

"Why shouldn't Holden have it?" he said.

Still, Jumonville is concerned that a recall could be used by a few disgruntled folks when someone doesn't vote their way.

Sullivan says the recall provision he submitted is based on that of other communities and would prevent frivolous recall attempts. If allowed by the legislature, it would first require 400 signatures on affidavits, and then 800 signatures on a petition. Only then, if the elected official doesn't step down, is a special ballot election held.

Several selectmen said they are concerned that it's the wrong time to discuss charter reform with the search for a new town manager in progress and the possibility that any change to the charter could alter the job of town manager.